Pros
Some coworkers were highly professional and passionate about doing good work. The claims department (now acquired by another company) had strong leadership and has since separated from the toxic environment.
Cons
Leadership culture is deeply problematic. The CEO has been known to operate under multiple aliases and has even communicated with contractors while posing as other staff members — a behavior that creates serious trust and ethical concerns. HR practices are questionable. Favoritism, nepotism, and retaliation appear to go unchecked. Multiple employees were reportedly pushed out under vague accusations, and internal relationships sometimes seemed to influence outcomes more than performance. Promised bonuses and PTO were often not honored. Restructures were used as a means to avoid fulfilling compensation agreements. Some performance data may have been altered and manipulated to justify non-payment. There was a period when background checks on contractors were paused, despite their roles involving entry into policyholder homes and leadership demanding more BG checks and complaince. This practice was only reinstated after the company lost a key insurance partner and sought to improve its image for investors. Sensitive policyholder data appears to be routed through affiliated overseas teams, raising serious data privacy questions. Some internal transfers involved staff supporting operations outside the U.S., but it’s unclear whether this has been fully disclosed to partners. Turnover is very high, and many experienced employees have left due to leadership decisions, toxic dynamics, and a lack of accountability. There are rumors that the company is pivoting into software and AI as a way to rebrand, but fundamental issues with leadership and trust remain unresolved.